The original post does seem to have enough data to support many of the
writer's observations, other comments notwithstanding. This doesn't mean
that they make sense, as he says. The uphill slowing description is
incalculable as the distance is not given. Over 1 metre its very easy. Over
10 km it's not etc.

Method 1:

A motorcycle  with fairing takes about 30 HP to ton *(100 mph)
Power needed is proportional to V^3.

So power needed to do 95 kph ~~~~=3D
    (95/160)^3 x 30 =3D

Method 2

Energy due to drag =3D 1.3 x Cd x A x V^3

     Cd =3D drag coefficient
     A =3D area m^2
     V =3D velocity m/s

At 95 kph V =3D 26.4 m/s

To get 2200 Watt [[watt]] you need a Cd x A product of 0.15
eg 1 m^2 area and Cd=3D0.15 (about impossible)
or A - 0.5 m^2 and Cd=3D0.3 etc.

A picture would be good, but I'd say  a reclining seated position would
allow under 0.5 m^2 frontal area. Add wheels to that and some body drag.
Body drag gets significant as length to area grows. Idf you can add some
"base bleed - air fed out tail to reduce base drag (maybe it stops the
airflow separating prior to the base  but that's getting speculative.

So - I'd say that the very very very best designs going MIGHT approach that
speed.

I haven't tried to look at the rolling while loaded with N people stuff. Yo=
u
can easily enough decide whether the laws of physics and perfect bearings
allow what you are seeing. If not

Quick glance. If the motors are off ypou can decide. If the motors are on
it's called throttle up :-).


        Russell
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.